states aren't supposed to contradict the u.s. supreme court. >> the montana case was a direct challenge to the supreme court's ruling in citizens united. it was unusual because it was a state supreme court saying, "you need to think about this again. we think you've made a mistake. at leasts it affects our laws in montana." >> ryssdal: there was, of course, one man who didn't think the court had made a mistake with citizens united. he's got a different view of money and politics. >> ryssdal: is money in politics inherently corrupting? >> definitely not. it doesn't corrupt the process. it's necessary for the process. to communicate, you have to spend money. so you have to have money to communicate. the problem we have is we don't have enough information available to voters to allow them to make informed choices, so we need more spending. >> ryssdal: do you think there's not enough information out there in american politics? >> look, the majority of the people do now know who their congressman is or who their senators are. so, you